Should have scrapped doing Superman all-together and went with a new less explored DC character.. Detective Chimp.
Man of Steel - How to fix it?
- Thread starter bartholen_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Consider how much criticism killing Zod drew, I suspect they will do exactly that.Zachary Amaranth said:
I'm not saying it will be great, but they will likely write Superman feeling guilt over it.
It's not going to make killing Zod, or the first movie, good, though, even if the writing, acting and directing in the MoS2 will be brilliant.
I do wonder how they will write the conflict between Batman and Superman.
Will Batman argue that killing is sometimes necessary? Or Superman?
While the issue of tone both in terms of the complete lack of anything hopeful or positive and the washed out colour scheme are important (and things which I consider to be bad decisions for the material), the fact is it still could have been grim and gritty *but been good*.
The real problem was that nothing fitted together. Characters, motivations, emotions, actions, themes - the incredibly important most basic elements to make any story work - were a complete shambles. Part of me wants to sit and spell out every instance, but I'll try and keep it brief and stick to the most flagrant examples.
Most importantly and glaringly, Superman's character is criminally underdeveloped to the point of being absent. The film chooses Zod as the villain to put Superman in this situation where he's between the two worlds he belongs to. The problem is he is never shown to have any reason to care about Earth. All the background we see is of him being bullied and generally made to feel like an alienated outsider (not least by his Dad!). Instead of being reporter Clark Kent with friends and colleagues he goes around being this drifter trying to hide from all of humanity. Despite this, when he finds the ship and discovers his origin he just doesn't seem that interested in finding out about it either. He has nothing invested in either side. The entire conflict the film builds itself around falls flat because the main character has no real stake in it. Or anything.
I was on board with the intro on Krypton. Partially because it really felt alien, which was a good way to try and shake up the formula. More, though, because it seemed to be doing a good job of setting up some themes, most notably the theme of predetermination vs free will. There was even an interesting dynamic between the complacent council, Zod as the manifestation of predermination gone wrong (or taken to its dark conclusion), and Jor-El as a free thinker.
The problem is that this aspect gets completely ignored throughout the middle of the film and in particular never touches on Superman himself. Superman never faces any pressure or conflict regarding predetermination, never has a moment when free will provides an answer or a solution. The closest it comes is Pa Kent's lectures about how he has to conform to normal society, but that one day he will become something special based on his biology... um, which rather puts him on the same side as Zod and the council. But that's not what Pa Kent was supposed to be doing (at least I don't think so, not entirely sure what they were trying to do with him at all) and his advice has no effects on anything in the film anyway.
If they just dropped it it would have been okay, if a wasted opportunity, but at the end they try and pick it up again with Zod. Presenting him as a prisoner to his genetic destiny and almost a sympathetic character, the problem is it has nothing to play off. Superman needs to embody free will to provide a counter, but that never materialised.
The real problem was that nothing fitted together. Characters, motivations, emotions, actions, themes - the incredibly important most basic elements to make any story work - were a complete shambles. Part of me wants to sit and spell out every instance, but I'll try and keep it brief and stick to the most flagrant examples.
Most importantly and glaringly, Superman's character is criminally underdeveloped to the point of being absent. The film chooses Zod as the villain to put Superman in this situation where he's between the two worlds he belongs to. The problem is he is never shown to have any reason to care about Earth. All the background we see is of him being bullied and generally made to feel like an alienated outsider (not least by his Dad!). Instead of being reporter Clark Kent with friends and colleagues he goes around being this drifter trying to hide from all of humanity. Despite this, when he finds the ship and discovers his origin he just doesn't seem that interested in finding out about it either. He has nothing invested in either side. The entire conflict the film builds itself around falls flat because the main character has no real stake in it. Or anything.
I was on board with the intro on Krypton. Partially because it really felt alien, which was a good way to try and shake up the formula. More, though, because it seemed to be doing a good job of setting up some themes, most notably the theme of predetermination vs free will. There was even an interesting dynamic between the complacent council, Zod as the manifestation of predermination gone wrong (or taken to its dark conclusion), and Jor-El as a free thinker.
The problem is that this aspect gets completely ignored throughout the middle of the film and in particular never touches on Superman himself. Superman never faces any pressure or conflict regarding predetermination, never has a moment when free will provides an answer or a solution. The closest it comes is Pa Kent's lectures about how he has to conform to normal society, but that one day he will become something special based on his biology... um, which rather puts him on the same side as Zod and the council. But that's not what Pa Kent was supposed to be doing (at least I don't think so, not entirely sure what they were trying to do with him at all) and his advice has no effects on anything in the film anyway.
If they just dropped it it would have been okay, if a wasted opportunity, but at the end they try and pick it up again with Zod. Presenting him as a prisoner to his genetic destiny and almost a sympathetic character, the problem is it has nothing to play off. Superman needs to embody free will to provide a counter, but that never materialised.
Okay, I'm going to stop now because this is a brilliant compromise between keeping the film close to what they wanted yet giving the characters actual... character. And is actually answering the question instead of just waffling adout abstract concepts. Nice job!The Dubya said:Oh yeah, fixing Man of Steel, right...
I don't wanna text wall you guys again, so I'll just put my ideas for this movie in spoiler tags. (Which I've posted elsewhere before, so I've thought this out for a bit.) (As an aspiring screenwriter, that's kinda my thing...)
No, not secret identity Clark, but as a meek, introverted, unassuming Joe Nobody, wanting to blend in with the background, actively wants to hide who he is. If you're going to go with the fear-mongering Papa Kent speeches, go all the way with it. Have Pa Kent be the asshole that pretty much scared Clark into never wanting to be anything more than "normal", therefore it'd make sense that he'd take a pencil pusher job in a major Metropolitan city where no one really notices the guy next to them. By doing that, we could also SEE exactly what his dad kept talking about. We could SEE the prejudices against the different and the exceptional that gave him such a downer/paranoid look on humanity...
BUT at the same time Clark gets to see a good side of humanity too. We get to see Lois Lane being strong and successful despite the prejudices she has to put up with being a woman in the work place. She?s aggressive and gung-ho and above-athe-call-of-duty to prove to everyone, including herself, that she belongs in this Boys Club world of international journalism. She would have a previously established relationship with Clark (through Lana); praising his skills as whatever his job would be but wanting him to get out of his shell more to be not just a better worker, but a better PERSON. She sees something special in Clark (hinty-hint-hint), and she wants him to be everything he can be. Of course Clark's like "Naw, I'm good being a nobody..." Oh hey look, it's like a character arc has been set or something.
We would also have had a better introduction to the other Daily Planet Crew: Jenny Olsen (or Jenny Jurwich...why was that person in this movie and why did she have a name? Ugh, anyways), the plucky, super optimistic intern that brightens the mood when she enters the room (even if at times she can be a little annoying). Where she idolizes Lois in parallel to the same way people are GOING to start idolizing Superman. Steve Lombard could actually have an introduction. He coulda been Clark?s ?male confidant? and could have been more on the cynical side if only to contrast Lois?s and Jenny?s (mostly Jenny's) optimism. Perry White could have been a better ?The Boss? character dealing with this band of employees; where he doesn't see much potential for Clark to grow as an employee (maybe even ponders firing him) but Lois is able to stand up for him; going so far as to want to bring CLARK of all people along to the Arctic to help her with the alien discovery Colonel Elliot Stabler and company have in store. Again, Lois would be shown taking charge by going toe to toe with the boys while Clark kinda shrinks back like he usually does. Oh hey look, it's a better reason for Clark and Lois to be in the Arctic at the same time other than implausible coincidence.
While out there, he could be thinking about what the contrast between what his dad and Lois say about him and about his murky origins until he ?feels summoned? to go to the cave. Those scenes could remain relatively unchanged I suppose, except now Lois would have a legit reason to follow Clark (she?s concerned for a friend of hers, especially for someone who would never normally do something like this). It?d blow her mind twenty different kind of ways if she saw meager little Clark suddenly be Mr. Holy Shit Superpowered Badass saving her from danger. Clark kinda hurries off before she has the chance to give him the twenty questions treatment and ends up running into Jor-El who giving him a brand new perspective on his world. Jor-El is telling his son Kal-el what he really needs to hear; that he IS meant for something more, and THIS was ?the time? Pa Kent was always alluding to. Epic Flying Scene commences.
While Clark is obviously busy, Lois returns to work to really crack down on who and/or what Clark REALLY is and finds out his backstory we saw in those generic flashbacks (minus the school bus scene and the EXTREMELY stupid tornado scene. Ma Kent at school and Pa Kent showing Clark the spaceship were fine). Something I would add though is that through her search, it's revealed that most the citizens of Smallville actually KNOW about Clark and his abilities. Like "yeah, we kinda figured it out. But we really aren't afraid of him. We know he's a good kid." "Does he know that you know?" "Probably not. But he doesn't have to tell us until he's ready. We can keep his secret."
Well ain't that interestin'.
Eventually that leads her to his Smallville home, in which Clark flies down to meet her for the first time in his Superman outfit. Here they would exchange surprised hellos, Clark would ask what exactly she's doing here, and they'd end up arguing about whether or not to release the story she's putting together, with Clark being on the side of "NO why should people know who I am, they?ll just freak out on me", and Lois on the side of "YES people should know that there is someone special like you out there, don't worry." Back and forth they go until Clark convinces Lois not to run the story online...too bad that she kinda already had Jenny secretly slip to story to the TMZ guy. Whoops. But hey Clark doesn't have to find out...yet. Anyways:
Before we move on, something subtle yet interesting happens...
To START OFF that last scene, when Clark flies down in full costume, all Lois would have to do was flinch, even just a little bit to speak volumes in terms of their characters. Lois isn't AFRAID of Superman, she?s just really shocked that ?holy crap not only is there a flying person in front of me, but I KNOW this flying person in front of me?at least I think I do since he?s so radically different now.? Honestly she?s kind leaning more towards happy than fearful; she was right in saying that there was something special about Clark. However?that one flinch Lois did would have made Clark second-guess himself. That one flinch would have sent to his mind ?Crap, my Pa Kent was right, Lois is scared and if she?s scared, what is everyone else going to think? Oh god oh god oh no oh nononononono.? Although he still trusts Lois to an extent, he still doesn't trust everyone else, sooooo he still entertains the idea that he might want to be a good ol? Kryptonian for once so he wouldn?t have to deal with this kind of stuff. If only there was someone out there that not only wanted Krypton to come back too, but had a means of doing so. If only?
Oh hai Zod.
Zod pops up with his message that's not as blatantly threatening as it is in MOS. More like it's an invitation for "Hey we lost our Krypton brother. He's down here with ya'll, so if you could reveal yourself and point yourself our way, we need to talk." That actually gets Superman pondering over some stuff: Holy crap, there ARE other people like me! And they're inviting me back with them! And also, which side of humanity is more true to their nature? Lois?s understanding kindness or Lois?s [perceived] fear of him? He decides to take the Leap Of Faith the deacon was talking about and away we go with pretty much the rest of the movie.
Ya see how much better this pre-existing relationship would work so much better? Lois would have known Clark for more than like, 30 minutes, so he would have had a better reason to require her to stick around AND she?d have a better reason to be on his Tag Team to convince the military dudes that Superman is indeed on their side (which BTW, the military was never ?afraid of him? either; they were just unclear what the extent of his relationship to Zod was. But since Clark has been SHOWN to have trust issues, then there you go).
Codex reveal, exposition stuff, yada yada?wait a minute, hold the phone Skippy. Is Clark actually kinda sorta considering Zod?s plan to be a halfway decent one? He DID lament on having Krypton return once more so he can feel close to his heritage, and Zod seems like a capable enough leader dude to get things done. So sure Kryptonian brethren, if you wanna go ahead and take this stuff out of me, we can go ahead and?.oh wait, rebuilding Krypton will be at the cost of this Earth that I?m growing to care for and trust more?
Well crap. Can't let that happen.
Let's actually put interesting stuff in these action scenes, shall we?
So it's Superman vs. The Krypton Crew in Smallville, a place Superman really doesn't want to fuck up. And that side of him shows once the fists and the UHaul trucks start flying. Like, say the Krypton crew start throwing shit toward Clark, but they're headed straight toward buildings he told people to run and be safe in. So instead of dodging out the way to make a special effect, he tries to catch some of the big debris to tone down collateral damage. But they end up throwing too much his way and WHACK! They get a major blow on him. Or when Superman gets slammed into a building, the ceiling/wall comes crashing down and is about to crush innocent civilians. So he swoops over to hold the building up, telling them "Go go get out of here!", leaving him wide open for an epic spear of doom.
Point is, there's STRATEGY going on here. The Kryptonians are taking full advantage of his protector nature and are going on the aggressive offense, wrecking shit up themselves and getting shots on Clark. So now Clark's gotta think how he's going to get his own offense in without having the town torn apart.
For the IHOP scene, at least take advantage of the location and the Pete Ross cameo: So in this scene you got Superman on the ropes, Faora's going in for the killing blow when out of nowhere, PETE ROSS LIKE A BOSS DIVES AT AND WRAPS HIS NERDY LITTLE ARMS AROUND FAORA'S LEGS, as a last ditch attempt to save Clark's life to repay him for being so kind to him back when they were kids. Faora obviously shakes him off, but that gives Clark just enough time to SUPERSPEAR her out of the IHOP and into the open cornfield that was a block away. A-ha! Now that there's no more Smallville to protect, Clark can REALLY focus on kicking some ass, which he does. Cool + smart = winning action scene!
But he still feels pretty bummed about the damage to Smallville (man, what have I done? Is this my fault?), and flies off in guilt before they really get a chance to thank him.
So Boom Pow, Fights, Explosions, Punch Punch, at least he attempts to be more careful after he stops the Doomsday machine and is back in Metropolis. Boom Pow rest of the movie commences.
We now KNOW Clark?s inner conflict and what side he ultimately chooses so with Zod going ?Ah ah ah! If you kill me, no more Kryptons!? angling would have actually made some sort of sense for him to try to do. We KNOW how he feels about the collateral damage he thinks he?s causing so the ?for everyone one you save we?ll kill a million more? line would have had more weight on him, so when he sees the complete utter devastation of his 2nd home Metropolis (that almost killed the Daily Planet workers that we GOT TO KNOW AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS FILM), THAT would have been the time to make him scream ?NOOOOOO! ZOD YOU PIECE OF SHIT MOTHERFUCKERRRRRRR? and start wailing on the guy with reckless abandon, fucking up shit on his own in the process. And I mean have Clark PISSED It could be a straight up ?Use the power of the Dark Side, Clark? parallel with Zod would be taunting him with if they wanted to go there before he eventually calms down and fights smarter. And with the ultimate killing of Zod, he forgoes his Kryptonian heritage once and for all puts his trust in the humans.
So what's the first thing that happens after this major event?
Drained and deflated, Superman falls to his knees. He's in the most vulnerable position he's been in all film. He, Lois (I'd make it so where they landed much close by), the family he saved are all silent until....the little boy slowly approaches Superman. This is one thing he's been trying to avoid throughout the whole movie, the reaction of people knowing what he really is, and now he's got nowhere to run. Closer and closer the little boy gets and then............
The little boy gives Superman a hug; softly thanking him the good he has done for them. Supes is stunned a bit, but eventually he wraps his arms around the little boy as well.
THAT. IS. SUPERMAN. Fuck yeah.
Lois Lane quickly thinks to capture this tender moment on her camera phone (she's a reporter and all) as she intends to show the true caring nature of Superman despite the damage to the city done. Superman struggles to rise to his feet until the little girl rushes over to help her brother help Superman up. The parents finally make their way over and give their thanks and appreciation. The humans he feared would strike him down are here lifting him back up to his feet. After all that's said and done, Superman and Lois eventually take off as the family and emerging survivors look up in awe.
Superman takes the two of them to a safe location where they can see a larger scale view of Metropolis. Lois reassures her friend that the city's destruction isn't his fault and that she'll be sure to champion him for the Hero he is. People will know about the Hero Superman really is. Clark acknowledges that he will trust not only her, but also the people. He then thanks Lois for trusting in him and believing in him, and Lois chimes back that Clark had The Man Of Steel inside of him all along. They embrace, he takes Lois wherever she needs to go, then he flies away, setting up the final scene of the film: sometime later, we see the boy creating a makeshift cape he ties behind him and a crayon Superman logo which he plasters on his chest, pretending to be the man that saved him. The final shot would be him looking up in the sky as his hero flies through the sky. Cue theme song [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVW1KW2qFU0], begin credits.
Game over, your tears are on autopilot.
The character arc is complete. He starts the film as weak-willed/confident/fearful Clark Kent to strong/confident/brave Superman. From shrinking and slumping his shoulders in failure and defeatism to standing tall and upright in triumph and victory. From taking the easy way out and just resting on your laurels in the background to making the hard decisions/changes to make you stand out above the crowd and reach the potential that you were truly meant for. Like Jor-El and the Kent parents and oh yeah Lois always believed he could.
Heck at least that would've given the two of them SOME reason to share a kiss by the end of the film; Clark is finally stepping up to live to the potential she knew he could be. I doubt she expected THIS much out of him, but a helluva step up is a helluva step up and she couldn't be happier for him. Personally I?d keep it platonic for this movie and wait for more intimacy to develop between them over potential sequels.
So he?s gotten over his trust issues and is officially Good Guy Superman. But will it pay off?? What if somebody like, say, Lex Luthor comes along and promises to rebuild Metropolis that (DUN DUN DUN!!!!) Superman had his part in destroying? Will the people he just saved turn on him again? Will he regret these new personal changes and stand down against Lex? Will his trust issues come back to rear its ugly head and allow Lex to be all Evil Supervillian? If he does confront Lex, how?s it gonna look to the people of Metropolis when Mr. Alien Superpowers That Tore Up Half The City fights against Mr. Normal Human Being That?s Rebuilding Said City? Is this going to be Superman's Harvey Dent???
FIND OUT IN MAN OF STEEL 2!!!!
So yeah. There's my less vicious and angry take on how I would change things up about this movie. The premise isn't bad at all, but the execution was just so god awful that I took it upon myself to try to and rectify Goyer's mistakes without changing the movie they wanted TOO much. It's still ultimately the same movie, they can keep all the wiz bang special effects and even the Codex nonsense, but Clark starting out at the Daily Planet would have completely saved this movie. At least to me.
If any of you crazies actually read my diatribe in full, thanks in advance
I left the theater feeling let down due to the amount of destruction Superman's fight against Zod had brought, it's too over the top. but then I started thinking "hey, remember when Brainiac downright tore a piece of Metropolis away in Action Comics?! Or when this other villain leveled the city just to get to Superman?!" And that's when I got it: I was being a pain in the ass for the movie having the sort of over the top destruction the very comic book has, events that would make such a city inviable in real life. When that was forgiven by myself, well the movie locked into gear and I love it...
As far as the ads go, c'mon people... A few years back every damn movie of every genre was filled with indirect advertisement and nobody complained, it doesn't hurt the movie at all, if anything it added to the fantasy that Metropolis and Smallvile are real, and that Superman, like it or not, is an all-American hero, I mean, Ihop and Sears?! That's downright USA. And even more important, as I said, it doesn't hurt the plot nor the action of the movie.
As for Lois Lane, yeah, as usual she's absolutely unnecessary, and at quite a few scenes one had to ask "what is this crazy woman doing there?!" like when they're about to throw the "bomb" in Zod's terraforming ship, she had no reason to be in the military's plane... DC realised, it seems, how needles she's in the story and how, in my opinion, she actually damages Superman's narrative in general, and changed his love interest from her to Wonder Woman, a demi-god who can actually kick ass, maybe even more than he does, and as such won't act like a damn escape every few comics with a cheap "help me Superman, my heel got stuck"...
As far as the ads go, c'mon people... A few years back every damn movie of every genre was filled with indirect advertisement and nobody complained, it doesn't hurt the movie at all, if anything it added to the fantasy that Metropolis and Smallvile are real, and that Superman, like it or not, is an all-American hero, I mean, Ihop and Sears?! That's downright USA. And even more important, as I said, it doesn't hurt the plot nor the action of the movie.
As for Lois Lane, yeah, as usual she's absolutely unnecessary, and at quite a few scenes one had to ask "what is this crazy woman doing there?!" like when they're about to throw the "bomb" in Zod's terraforming ship, she had no reason to be in the military's plane... DC realised, it seems, how needles she's in the story and how, in my opinion, she actually damages Superman's narrative in general, and changed his love interest from her to Wonder Woman, a demi-god who can actually kick ass, maybe even more than he does, and as such won't act like a damn escape every few comics with a cheap "help me Superman, my heel got stuck"...
I loved that there was some actual, y'know, hero stuff. So few real hero scenes in hero shows.
It really will be hard to fix this series. I don't need the Superman is Jesus stuff. And he isn't Batman. He is supposed to be a happy, well adjusted Kansas man (even if the ultimate immigrant.) He is supposed to have a full life and lots of friends. (Also, get him a more appropriate female than Amy Adams. Love her, but she's wrong for this.)
What we got? This:
It really will be hard to fix this series. I don't need the Superman is Jesus stuff. And he isn't Batman. He is supposed to be a happy, well adjusted Kansas man (even if the ultimate immigrant.) He is supposed to have a full life and lots of friends. (Also, get him a more appropriate female than Amy Adams. Love her, but she's wrong for this.)
What we got? This:
Because I hate bad films, and I especially hate when said bad films are revered by many. I come here to speak my opinion, and to justify it.KazeAizen said:
As for feeling sorry, I don't see why. Theres nothing special about Superman; it's just another average superhero franchise.
Just reboot the Superman franchise again, and this time, start without Zack Snyder. I'd like a movie without wanton destruction and unnecessary sci-fi angles. I'd like a brighter movie where, even if conflicted in his choices, Superman doesn't go on a world tour of angst. Most of all, I'd like a movie that doesn't allow Zack Snyder to continue his worthless career of endless "cool" slo-mo action sequences entirely devoid of dynamism or creativity.
Write the script less like you just want scenes for your trailer and more like an actual movie.
Shorten the downtime in the middle, i fell sleep halfway through. everyone already knows Supermans origin story anyways.
Remove Louis Lane's teleport powers. She seemed to arrive everywhere faster than even superman
Shorten the downtime in the middle, i fell sleep halfway through. everyone already knows Supermans origin story anyways.
Remove Louis Lane's teleport powers. She seemed to arrive everywhere faster than even superman
He's not just another superhero franchise. He is THE superhero franchise, but we can debate that all day. Jaded and cynical as people are these days it doesn't surprise me that people gravitate more towards Batman. This isn't a bad film. Its not the best film mind you but I wouldn't call it a bad one. Its a divisive film if nothing else.Annihilist said:
How to fix it? Umm start over? No really. But as far as what was wrong with it.
1. Superman completely lacked his traditional moral compass and structure. Without this you do not have Superman. You have Hyperion or Black Adam or The Plutonian or that Will Smith character etc etc any of the hundreds of godlike superbeings that have been portrayed in comics and film since. The Kansas farm boy boy scout. The strict moral center that defines the character. Marvel did a great job of presenting that sort of view in a modern movie with Captain America First Avenger. DC failed horribly with Man of Steel. And this isn't a matter of "A new darker take on Superman". Yes you can play around n the Superman mythos. You can give it a modern spin. But there are some things that you cannot change and still call it Superman. (which granted I don't think they ever did). They needed to better establish Clark Kent and Clark Kent's sense of morality BEFORE all the chaos.
2. Zod! No really Zod should not have been in the first reboot movie. Zod should have been in number 2 or 3. Zod is supposed to be the escalation of tension. The point where Superman's morality bumps up against the hard wall of overpowering destruction. Before pulling the trigger on Zod they filmakers first needed to firmly establish that Superman does not kill. Superman does not cause rampant destruction. Superman takes the danger away from those he protects. And then Zod challenges all of those assumptions. Zod is a sequel villain. Not an introductory villain. Superman killing Zod in the comics worked because John Byrne had spent 2 years re-establishing what Superman would and would not do. Then when he finally had to do it he exiled himself into space in despair and remorse for another year. This movie or rather these movies needed to do the same.
3. Pa Kent. The weird thing is I really liked Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent. I just hated the lines they made him say. While I get what they were going for with the whole "let the schoolkids die" scene, I think they wildly missed the mark. Pa had to be a little less "let the kids die" and a little more "you needed to save the kids, but the risk to you..." and his death scene was just idiotic. All flash with no reason. I don't want to compare this to the original Chris Reeve movie, but look at the death of Jonathan Kent scene in that. It happens in less than a minute. With virtually no dialogue. But in those few seconds it so perfectly frames the limits of Clark Kent and Superman. All this power, all these abilities, and there is absolutely nothing he can do. He is completely helpless.
4. Disaster Porn. Hey can we knock down a few more buildings maybe? I mean really! Please? Cause we just can't get enough of that. While you are at it keep shaking the camera and throw up clouds and clouds of gray dust obscuring everything. Oh and make sure it goes on continuously for the entire third act of the movie. 45 minutes minimum please. The rampant pointless orgasmic destruction had me wishing I was watching something with less. Like a Transformers movie. When you have me craving Michael Bay as the better option you are doing it wrong.
5. Shaky Cam. Dear Zack Snyder, Buy a F--kin Tripod and a Dolly! Please!
6. Washed out blue and orange everything. While you're out buying a tripod Zack, swing buy the old Visioncenter and get your vision tested. I think you might be color blind, and it's horribly impacting your work.
7. krypton. OK I am mixed on this one. I actually kind of like most of the graphical take on Krypton, and much of the lore. The design work really well harkens back to John Byrnes reboot from the 80's. I like the darker and less altruistic take on the Kryptonians. But with that said, it just got too bloody complicated for no reason whatsoever. To much shit set up in the beginning that had no real concrete payoff. Or at best acted as a tangential mcguffin. The whole Codex is in Superman thing? Why? The Superman is the first live birth thing? Neat, but to what purpose? We have a coup going on and failing... in the middle of the planets destruction? It just gets to be too much. And the sad thing is I liked what I saw of Krypton. I think many of the stuff put into those few minutes would have been great, had they been fleshed out into their own movie or miniseries. Say a 13 episode "World of Krypton" cable show with some SciFi Game of Thrones overtures? That would have been awesome. What we got in this movie? Considerably less so. Once again it would have been a much much better use of Zod.
8. The over compression of every horrible or bad thing that ever happened in the comics over 50 years into one 2 hour movie. Ugh! Superman's origin, the killing of Zod. Rampant destruction of Metrolpolis. Rampant destruction of Smallville. Superman as a scary alien. etc etc. It just goes on and on. They took a ton of imagery from a wide range of the original comics. And they just packed it all in with no build up. No context and no clue. They tried to do too much at once and failed to do anything.
9. Let's not forget the Penis's. Yep it's a Zack Snyder movie. Got to sneak in lots and lots of penis driven winks nods and subtext. We just can't get enough of that sort of thing.
I think the defining moment for me was when I went to see this movie while my wife was away. It was a packed theater for an afternoon matinee and a mother had her two young sons sit next to me. I'd say ages 6 and 9. Real Superman fans especially the older Who seemed to have watched every animated show and knew everything. These poor kids were in horrified outrage by the middle of the third act. When Zod's neck snapped the younger was sobbing while the older was angrily shouting at the screen THAT'S NOT SUPERMAN!!! SUPERMAN DOESN'T DO THAT!". If you make a Superman movie that you cannot take the entire family to, then you have inexcusably failed at making a Superman movie. I mean really who was this movie made for? 30-40 something neck bearded nerds mixed with a healthy dose of Call of Duty sociopaths who just like watching the world explode?
1. Superman completely lacked his traditional moral compass and structure. Without this you do not have Superman. You have Hyperion or Black Adam or The Plutonian or that Will Smith character etc etc any of the hundreds of godlike superbeings that have been portrayed in comics and film since. The Kansas farm boy boy scout. The strict moral center that defines the character. Marvel did a great job of presenting that sort of view in a modern movie with Captain America First Avenger. DC failed horribly with Man of Steel. And this isn't a matter of "A new darker take on Superman". Yes you can play around n the Superman mythos. You can give it a modern spin. But there are some things that you cannot change and still call it Superman. (which granted I don't think they ever did). They needed to better establish Clark Kent and Clark Kent's sense of morality BEFORE all the chaos.
2. Zod! No really Zod should not have been in the first reboot movie. Zod should have been in number 2 or 3. Zod is supposed to be the escalation of tension. The point where Superman's morality bumps up against the hard wall of overpowering destruction. Before pulling the trigger on Zod they filmakers first needed to firmly establish that Superman does not kill. Superman does not cause rampant destruction. Superman takes the danger away from those he protects. And then Zod challenges all of those assumptions. Zod is a sequel villain. Not an introductory villain. Superman killing Zod in the comics worked because John Byrne had spent 2 years re-establishing what Superman would and would not do. Then when he finally had to do it he exiled himself into space in despair and remorse for another year. This movie or rather these movies needed to do the same.
3. Pa Kent. The weird thing is I really liked Kevin Costner as Jonathan Kent. I just hated the lines they made him say. While I get what they were going for with the whole "let the schoolkids die" scene, I think they wildly missed the mark. Pa had to be a little less "let the kids die" and a little more "you needed to save the kids, but the risk to you..." and his death scene was just idiotic. All flash with no reason. I don't want to compare this to the original Chris Reeve movie, but look at the death of Jonathan Kent scene in that. It happens in less than a minute. With virtually no dialogue. But in those few seconds it so perfectly frames the limits of Clark Kent and Superman. All this power, all these abilities, and there is absolutely nothing he can do. He is completely helpless.
4. Disaster Porn. Hey can we knock down a few more buildings maybe? I mean really! Please? Cause we just can't get enough of that. While you are at it keep shaking the camera and throw up clouds and clouds of gray dust obscuring everything. Oh and make sure it goes on continuously for the entire third act of the movie. 45 minutes minimum please. The rampant pointless orgasmic destruction had me wishing I was watching something with less. Like a Transformers movie. When you have me craving Michael Bay as the better option you are doing it wrong.
5. Shaky Cam. Dear Zack Snyder, Buy a F--kin Tripod and a Dolly! Please!
6. Washed out blue and orange everything. While you're out buying a tripod Zack, swing buy the old Visioncenter and get your vision tested. I think you might be color blind, and it's horribly impacting your work.
7. krypton. OK I am mixed on this one. I actually kind of like most of the graphical take on Krypton, and much of the lore. The design work really well harkens back to John Byrnes reboot from the 80's. I like the darker and less altruistic take on the Kryptonians. But with that said, it just got too bloody complicated for no reason whatsoever. To much shit set up in the beginning that had no real concrete payoff. Or at best acted as a tangential mcguffin. The whole Codex is in Superman thing? Why? The Superman is the first live birth thing? Neat, but to what purpose? We have a coup going on and failing... in the middle of the planets destruction? It just gets to be too much. And the sad thing is I liked what I saw of Krypton. I think many of the stuff put into those few minutes would have been great, had they been fleshed out into their own movie or miniseries. Say a 13 episode "World of Krypton" cable show with some SciFi Game of Thrones overtures? That would have been awesome. What we got in this movie? Considerably less so. Once again it would have been a much much better use of Zod.
8. The over compression of every horrible or bad thing that ever happened in the comics over 50 years into one 2 hour movie. Ugh! Superman's origin, the killing of Zod. Rampant destruction of Metrolpolis. Rampant destruction of Smallville. Superman as a scary alien. etc etc. It just goes on and on. They took a ton of imagery from a wide range of the original comics. And they just packed it all in with no build up. No context and no clue. They tried to do too much at once and failed to do anything.
9. Let's not forget the Penis's. Yep it's a Zack Snyder movie. Got to sneak in lots and lots of penis driven winks nods and subtext. We just can't get enough of that sort of thing.
I think the defining moment for me was when I went to see this movie while my wife was away. It was a packed theater for an afternoon matinee and a mother had her two young sons sit next to me. I'd say ages 6 and 9. Real Superman fans especially the older Who seemed to have watched every animated show and knew everything. These poor kids were in horrified outrage by the middle of the third act. When Zod's neck snapped the younger was sobbing while the older was angrily shouting at the screen THAT'S NOT SUPERMAN!!! SUPERMAN DOESN'T DO THAT!". If you make a Superman movie that you cannot take the entire family to, then you have inexcusably failed at making a Superman movie. I mean really who was this movie made for? 30-40 something neck bearded nerds mixed with a healthy dose of Call of Duty sociopaths who just like watching the world explode?
Less shaky cam, less extended action schlock, NO fucking product placement...all great ideas, and I agree, but most importantly: Let the bloody actors ACT, and the characters develop.
They got the casting spot on for most characters, but you wouldn't think it given how little time they have to develop ANYTHING before getting pushed blindly into the next scene. What few moments they have, they sell it.
Even that infamous scene where Superman breaks Zod's neck to save some innocents...I think it's one of the very few legitimate performances in the movie. (even if Lois Lane magically bamfs to Clark's side seconds afterward...how convenient.)
...Well, it gets cut off by another sudden jump cut to the next scene...in a completely different time and place.
Sadly, any suggestions I can offer would fall flat because apart from me and my friends, everyone else applauded at the end. Dead serious. People applauded the boring polished turd. But then again, I noticed while leaving that most of the audience were children and their parents. So I dunno.
It's like if Stephanie Meyer wrote a character inspired by Navi from the Ocarina of Time, amped her annoying tendencies up twelve-fold, and then some Hollywood hack translated that into a movie.
Holy fuck is it annoying and it's in 95% of the movie.
It's not bluntly offensive nor crude and unfunny, but annoying. Not even a spoof. It's just pure, plain annoying.
They got the casting spot on for most characters, but you wouldn't think it given how little time they have to develop ANYTHING before getting pushed blindly into the next scene. What few moments they have, they sell it.
Even that infamous scene where Superman breaks Zod's neck to save some innocents...I think it's one of the very few legitimate performances in the movie. (even if Lois Lane magically bamfs to Clark's side seconds afterward...how convenient.)
...Well, it gets cut off by another sudden jump cut to the next scene...in a completely different time and place.
Sadly, any suggestions I can offer would fall flat because apart from me and my friends, everyone else applauded at the end. Dead serious. People applauded the boring polished turd. But then again, I noticed while leaving that most of the audience were children and their parents. So I dunno.
I propose adding "The Host" to that list. And no, I do not make that statement lightly given the company it keeps.The Dubya said:
It's like if Stephanie Meyer wrote a character inspired by Navi from the Ocarina of Time, amped her annoying tendencies up twelve-fold, and then some Hollywood hack translated that into a movie.
Holy fuck is it annoying and it's in 95% of the movie.
It's not bluntly offensive nor crude and unfunny, but annoying. Not even a spoof. It's just pure, plain annoying.
True. Though just the thought of people happily clapping to...that still makes me ill.The Dubya said:
I really hope so. Man of Steel was just a frustrating sit for me. I wanted to leave, but damned if I am ever going to walk out on a film I pay to see.
Then again, I really didn't want to see it because I knew it was Zack Snyder, but eh...obligations.
It says a lot when going to the Steak n' Shake just down the street was the highlight of the evening.
Fair enough. Top 5 worst is still plenty bad given the absolutely horrid shit we've had this year.
One other thing. Way too much broad destruction with absolutely no tension, threat or character development. It's telling that The one sequence that really really worked in the movie involved neither Superman nor Zod. That whole Smallville fight between Faora and the Law and Order SVU dude. That was great! It had emotion. It had threat. It had shear hopelessness and bravery in a no win situation. It was tight. It was contained. And every moment of it added to the two characters involved. And then the rest of the movie is Superman and Zod punching each other's through buildings. Heck the average Godzilla movie does that better and with better character development of the lizard.
See, there actually is a reason for why Superman doesn't kill. Watch Superman Vs The Elite. It's actually really interesting as to why he doesn't kill, and what would happen if he did.Johnny Novgorod said:
And I wouldn't have either of his parents die. The way I see superman, is as the ultimate comic book moral good-guy. He should become who he is, just out of the goodness within him. That's part of the reason I like the DC Animated Universe (Justice League version and Superman The Animated Series versions) version of the character the best. So me personally, I would have had his father not die, and have Lois Lane fall in love with Superman, not Clark Kent (eventually revealing they are the same person in a later movie allowing for character growth on both ends). NOT have Emile Hamilton die as he is a major supporting character for Superman. Killing him off would be like killing off Lucius Fox (you know, the guy who makes almost all of Batman's technology) in Batman right after he gets the costume.
My biggest gripe with it was the fight scenes though. Early Superman movies did not go too heavy on the fight scenes because you really can't kill Superman. So they had a lot of conversational scenes, and here they over compensated. A lot of it was just being punched through one building after another. Once you've seen someone getting punched through an office building, you've seen it enough. Do something different with them, they just felt too repetitive.
Man of Steel was a downwards curve from the start. It started out good, but went to bad then awful.
The good:
Krypton. I liked the interpretation and the actors. Everything here was cool.
Kevin Costner. I was superhappy to see him in movies again, and he was awesome, but extremely 1 dimensional and underused. I didnt really like what they did with him, but I was happy to see Costner.
The bad:
The story fell completely apart after the action bonanza started.
The action bonanza.
Lawrence Fishburne or whatever his name is COMPLETELY miscast and pointless as Perry White.
Whatshername as Lois Lane. Did a good job, but didnt really give me a feeling I was watching Lois Lane.
Supes himself. Awful. No charm, no warmth, he might as well have been wearing a US marine outfit. The suit meant NOTHING.
Supes kills a guy. Yeah I know superman has done that in the comics at some point, but thats NOT what superman is about. His job is to be that which we aspire to be. Better than us. He might as well have been a stupid soldier. WASTED.
The empty city. Metropolis felt more like a ghost town than a place with real stakes when the shit hit the fan. Superman barely saved any civilians he just threw mega-punches. Pathetic.
Supes kills a guy!!! I really dont get why this had to be. To make supes more "grounded"? "real"? "beliavable"? I made a grimace when it happened and the event festered in my like an undressed wound. It ruined what was left of the experience for me.
If this had happened in the start of the movie it MIGHT have been used as a character builder that made supes into what he is supposed to be. As it stands, it was a "NOOOOOOO", a hug from lois, then everything was fine. PATHETIC.
I recently sat down to rewatch the cool parts of Man of Steel...but I realized there was nothing there I wanted to revisit. Not even the spectacular action. The movie was a fucking disgrace.
The good:
Krypton. I liked the interpretation and the actors. Everything here was cool.
Kevin Costner. I was superhappy to see him in movies again, and he was awesome, but extremely 1 dimensional and underused. I didnt really like what they did with him, but I was happy to see Costner.
The bad:
The story fell completely apart after the action bonanza started.
The action bonanza.
Lawrence Fishburne or whatever his name is COMPLETELY miscast and pointless as Perry White.
Whatshername as Lois Lane. Did a good job, but didnt really give me a feeling I was watching Lois Lane.
Supes himself. Awful. No charm, no warmth, he might as well have been wearing a US marine outfit. The suit meant NOTHING.
Supes kills a guy. Yeah I know superman has done that in the comics at some point, but thats NOT what superman is about. His job is to be that which we aspire to be. Better than us. He might as well have been a stupid soldier. WASTED.
The empty city. Metropolis felt more like a ghost town than a place with real stakes when the shit hit the fan. Superman barely saved any civilians he just threw mega-punches. Pathetic.
Supes kills a guy!!! I really dont get why this had to be. To make supes more "grounded"? "real"? "beliavable"? I made a grimace when it happened and the event festered in my like an undressed wound. It ruined what was left of the experience for me.
If this had happened in the start of the movie it MIGHT have been used as a character builder that made supes into what he is supposed to be. As it stands, it was a "NOOOOOOO", a hug from lois, then everything was fine. PATHETIC.
I recently sat down to rewatch the cool parts of Man of Steel...but I realized there was nothing there I wanted to revisit. Not even the spectacular action. The movie was a fucking disgrace.
I actually liked this movie. But then again, I wasn't expecting the Second Coming of Christopher Reeve (may he rest in peace) or giving it too much thought. I just sat back and let it do its movie thing.
As such, I liked the portrayal of Clark/Superman as a man in search of his place in the world. It accomplished in an hour what the entire run of "Smallville" took ten excruciating years to do. And the whole "Killing Zod" thing worked for me as part of an "origin story". Basically, he tried killing once. He didn't like it.
However, a couple of things did jump out at me:
{b]1) The Casting[/b]
I like Amy Adams and Michael Shannon, but they just didn't do it for me in their roles.
As another poster remarked, Amy Adams just didn't feel like Lois Lane. She was just some random perky woman tracking a story about a mysterious Do-gooder who vanished after the day was saved. While I liked that angle, I wonder if another actress might have played it more...Lois-y?
And while nobody does crazy like Michael Shannon, he was just the wrong kind of crazy for Zod. Maybe I have too much nostalgia for Terrance Stamp, but I felt Zod should have had more gravitas and bearing. He was, after all, a general. The whole time, I felt perhaps Russell Crowe would have been more suited for THAT role.
(I also had a hard time NOT thinking of the "Funny or Die" clip where Michael Shannon reads the Sorority President's email. "C*nt punch", anyone?)
2) Pa Kent
I thought the whole reason for Superman's Boy Scout-ish moral compass was his rootsy Midwestern upbringing. How, then, can Pa Kent be espousing self preservation potentially at the cost of innocent lives? Seems to me that would be a philosophy prescribed by his OTHER father.
In fact, it would have been more interesting to have a situation where both Earth Dad and Space Dad tell him to use his powers for good. But Earth Dad preaches compassion where Space Dad appreciates indifference...needs of the many, and all that.
3) Flaw in Logic
Yes, there are many And most have been covered by other posters. But this one really stood out to me:
The film touched on that briefly when the Kryptonians first got to Earth but, as Diddy Mao mentions above, didn't really exploit.
As such, I liked the portrayal of Clark/Superman as a man in search of his place in the world. It accomplished in an hour what the entire run of "Smallville" took ten excruciating years to do. And the whole "Killing Zod" thing worked for me as part of an "origin story". Basically, he tried killing once. He didn't like it.
However, a couple of things did jump out at me:
{b]1) The Casting[/b]
I like Amy Adams and Michael Shannon, but they just didn't do it for me in their roles.
As another poster remarked, Amy Adams just didn't feel like Lois Lane. She was just some random perky woman tracking a story about a mysterious Do-gooder who vanished after the day was saved. While I liked that angle, I wonder if another actress might have played it more...Lois-y?
And while nobody does crazy like Michael Shannon, he was just the wrong kind of crazy for Zod. Maybe I have too much nostalgia for Terrance Stamp, but I felt Zod should have had more gravitas and bearing. He was, after all, a general. The whole time, I felt perhaps Russell Crowe would have been more suited for THAT role.
(I also had a hard time NOT thinking of the "Funny or Die" clip where Michael Shannon reads the Sorority President's email. "C*nt punch", anyone?)
2) Pa Kent
I thought the whole reason for Superman's Boy Scout-ish moral compass was his rootsy Midwestern upbringing. How, then, can Pa Kent be espousing self preservation potentially at the cost of innocent lives? Seems to me that would be a philosophy prescribed by his OTHER father.
In fact, it would have been more interesting to have a situation where both Earth Dad and Space Dad tell him to use his powers for good. But Earth Dad preaches compassion where Space Dad appreciates indifference...needs of the many, and all that.
3) Flaw in Logic
Yes, there are many And most have been covered by other posters. But this one really stood out to me:
This one really bugged me. Not only should Superman have been heavily saturated with "Yellow Sun" radiation, he had his whole life to learn how to master his powers. No matter how skilled the Kryptonian warriors may have been, someone with a lifetime of experience would have proven superior.Diddy_Mao said:
The film touched on that briefly when the Kryptonians first got to Earth but, as Diddy Mao mentions above, didn't really exploit.